if there were even to be a logo at all, the URL one is good, as it is the one most associated with the foundation. also, it is the one used in the SCP games, so i think it would help people looking for content in that area. i remember when i tried, i came here, and i thought it was something else. So by adding the logo, it might attract more people. any other thoughts or whatnot?

The initialism "SCP" is used twelve times on the front page (and not counting the sidebar) before you even have to scroll. Not to mention which, how would someone even get to this site without being aware? The logo, I feel, is not needed from a recognition standpoint.

That is true, so if people (hopefully of age) are coming here looking for what they want, i think you're right on that stand point. Maybe we need to crate a new thread stating "no logo". With permission from an admin of course, so that a "no logo" thing would/might happen.

Honestly it depends. I'm trying to get the logo through, but as other people post, things change. But more opinions the better, so its mainly not up to me, but what everyone else thinks. So I'm just trying to help.

I believe that a foundation logo is fairly unnecessary, because the whole "The SCP Foundation" is in the title. The url is "www.scp-wiki.net". The front page alone says "The SCP Foundation" in big letters. Our featured article is an SCP article. We have a huge block of "SCP-2000 contest" up right now. I don't believe we need a logo on top of this for people who see all of this and still wonder if this is the SCP Foundation.

This is the forum for a writing community. If you want to be taken seriously, I suggest you start using proper spelling, capitalization, grammar, and punctuation. Right now, you're coming off as either being way too young to be a part of this community or someone who simply doesn't think before typing; if you want to be heard, then you need to put more thought into your posts.

There's a couple of sides to this issue:

The logo has never been officially recognized. Many members of the administration actively fought against the adoption of any logo, much less the existing one, and thus there has never truly been consensus on whether the Foundation even has a logo, much less the commonly presented one.

Containment Breach is a fan game and a derivative work of the SCP wiki, and is considered by many to represent some aspects of the Foundation very poorly, particularly in the operational security and look-and-feel department. A lot of people get very hostile when people suggest that changes be made because Containment Breach did it. It bears note that the author of SCP:CB is, to the best of my knowledge, not an active site member.

That said:

The theme for the SCP Wiki is absolutely terrible, and honestly makes some old Geocities sites look good by comparison. It is in dire need of a visual overhaul, but this isn't likely to happen any time soon because no active members of the staff — much less the administration that actually has the power to change any of this — are well-versed in web design and have the capability to update the site theme.

Masterdiekillsu, definitely take note that your posts will go over better if you take the time to properly write out your thoughts with correct grammar and capital letters. I'm still a little unclear about what was being asked as this thread went on, but as far as the logo not being on the main page, I think it's fine. Anyone who really can't make the connection better the site because of the lack of a big logo on the main page probably isn't going to stick around very long. You made the connection, so it's safe to assume most people can make figure it out on their own.

As for what Aelanna said about the logo, that sort of boggles my mind. I came to the site just from a random creepy image/link, but at some point I saw the logo and just figured it was the "official" logo. I've seen it, or subtle variations of it, all over on Foundation related material and haven't come across too many other alternatives. Has it just kind of settled in? Is it more like a head-canon thing, where some people just agree with it and others just hold it as nonexistent?